Re: FW: kernel source patching
On Sat, 2002-08-31 at 22:39, Chris A. Morgan wrote:
> Hi List
>
> I'm struggling through the sea of documentation as a linux and Debian newbie. Got Debian 3.0 installed (2.4.18-bf.2) on my Thinkpad 770 with only a few minor annoyances like no sound and some other strange functionalities.
>
> I want to upgrade to 2.4.19 kernel and compile it myself to perhaps get more things working. I installed the source code from Debian CD's for 2.4.18 and downloaded a 2.4.19 patch from kernel.org. When I applied the patch, I got a zillion FAILED messages, apparently because Debians version of the source code has been heavily patched and modified already. How can I get clean source code to patch?? Downloading the entire source code (over 30M) on my dialup is problematic. Would it help to just compile 2.4.18 as I have it or would that give me what I already have again? I'm a little frustrated from weeks of just trying to get Debian functional.
>
> If you can help me, please reply directly since I am not subscribed to the list right now (200+ emails a day is beyond me).
Ok basically the source that you got in the tarball that you got off the
CD (Im guessing thats where you got it) should be the pristine source.
Only if you run the .diff or the .dsc over it(I forget which) should the
source be modified. Try doing a make clean before patching. Also I
have noticed lately that some of the kernel patches act kinda screwy if
you patch them from outside the root directory. Try cding into the
linux directory then doing a zcat patch.gz | patch -p1 That should give
you the proper patch with out any errors. Also try using make-kpkg to
do your kernel building. First
apt-get install libncurses5-dev kernel-package
then
make menuconfig to configure it
then
make-kpkg clean
make-kpkg kernel_image
as always you should man make-kpkg for full set of options(I would
really recommend this).
I hope this helps... peace.
PS. Try setting your column width to something like 74, it helps more
people to be able to read your email.
--
Reply to: